Among them, four French former executives of Lafarge and its Syrian subsidiary will be tried for \u201cfinancing terrorist enterprises\u201d and \u201cfailure to comply with international financial sanctions\u201d: Bruno Lafont, CEO of the group until 2015; Christian H\u00e9rault, then deputy chief operating officer; Bruno Pescheux and Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric Jolibois, former directors of the Syrian subsidiary, Lafarge Cement Syria (LCS). Alongside them, a Norwegian, Jacob Waerness, a Jordanian, Ahmad al Jaloudi, a Syrian, Firas Tlass, and a Syrian-American, Amro Taleb, all of whom operated in Syria on behalf of Lafarge, will appear in court on the sole charge of \u201cfinancing terrorist enterprises\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, the trial does not cover all of the charges against Lafarge: in this case, the company has also been charged with \u201ccomplicity in crimes against humanity.\u201d Initially examined as part of the same judicial investigation, this charge was separated in 2023. The investigation into this aspect of the case is ongoing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This decision, to split the case in two, weighs heavily on the civil parties, including some 200 former employees of the Syrian cement plant, who are aware that this separation will delay the trial they are awaiting. \u00c9lise Le Gall, a lawyer representing some of these employees, nevertheless wants to view this first step as \u201can opportunity to obtain additional information that will be useful in the ongoing investigation\u201d. But for her, it is also an opportunity to focus on the multinational\u2019s \u201cfinancial spiral\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cSecurity payments\u201d to the organization Islamic State<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
It all started at the Jalabiya plant. The cement factory, located in northeastern Syria, was still under construction when it was acquired by Lafarge in 2007, following the takeover of Orascom Cement, an Egyptian cement company. The investment opened up new markets for the manufacturer - particularly in the Middle East and Africa - but it also increased its debt. So, in 2010, when the Syrian factory finally went into operation in a region where demand for cement was set to grow rapidly, Lafarge expected a return on its investment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But in 2011, the Syrian revolution broke out. Within a few months, the country was plunged into civil war. Despite the instability, Lafarge\u2019s management decided to maintain production. The cement plant was managed by Lafarge Cement Syria, a subsidiary 98.7% owned by the group. It was not until July 2012, when all French companies in Syria had already ceased operations, that Lafarge began to prepare for the gradual evacuation of its foreign employees. Syrian employees, however, continued to work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was then, as armed groups fought over the region, that Lafarge and LCS allegedly began negotiations to guarantee access for trucks and employees to the factory, but also their release in the event of kidnapping or arrest. These so-called \u201csecurity\u201d payments - initially made to rebels of the Free Syrian Army and Kurdish fighters - quickly benefited several groups deemed as terrorists, which were gradually gaining influence. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Between 2013 and 2014, the French investigating judges estimate that Lafarge transferred \u20ac3.1 million in \u201csecurity payments\u201d to the organization Islamic State (IS), to Jabhat al-Nosra, and to Ahrar al-Sham. They also estimate that the company \u201cinjected\u201d nearly \u20ac1.9 million into the local economy by purchasing raw materials (pozzolan, sand, petroleum hydrocarbons) from suppliers \u201cunder the control of Islamic State\u201d. The transactions were taxed at 10% by the jihadists: approximately \u20ac187,000 is believed to have been paid directly to the organization in taxes.<\/p>\n\n\n\t
Resumption of activity after the proclamation of a caliphate<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
In the summer of 2014, the situation became untenable. According to the referral order consulted by Justice Info, the factory closed its doors. But it reopened in early September, after reaching, according to the investigating magistrates, a financial agreement with the organization IS, \u201csupposed to be valid until February 2015\u201d. The court document indicates that the sum paid at that time came several weeks after the organization IS proclaimed a caliphate on 29 June 29 2014, and the adoption on 15 August 2014<\/a> of a UN Security Council resolution condemning \u201cany direct or indirect trade with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the al-Nusra Front, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings, and entities associated with al-Qaeda\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, on 18 September 2014, while some 30 employees continued to run the cement plant, the jihadist group threatened the region - and the industrial site - with an imminent assault. A few days later, Lafarge<\/a> told the press that the plant had been shut down and the staff evacuated. In reality, \u201cno manager told us to leave,\u201d said a former LCS employee interviewed by Justine Augier in a book entitled Personne morale<\/a>. Faced with the imminent attack, employees were forced to flee by their own means: \u201cIf we had left an hour later, Daesh would have cut off our heads. [...] Lafarge didn\u2019t care. We just ran away. It\u2019s too hard for me to remember that moment,\u201d this employee said. Three days later, a jihadist propaganda video was released showing the Jalabiya cement plant in the hands of the organization IS. Four employees were captured and held hostage for ten days before being released.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Two years later, the story broke in the press: in February 2016, on the Syrian news site Zaman Al Wasl<\/a>; and in Le Monde<\/a>, in June of the same year. Two complaints are filed. It is the starting point of a long legal battle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In September 2016, the French ministry of Economy and Finance filed the first complaint, accusing the company of violating the embargo imposed on Syria by the European Union. This embargo prohibited any financial or commercial relations with the Syrian regime and groups subject to sanctions, including the organization IS. Two months later, a second complaint was filed with the national anti-terrorism prosecutor\u2019s office by eleven Syrian employees and two non-governmental organizations: Sherpa<\/a> and the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR<\/a>). It targeted Lafarge, its Syrian subsidiary (LCS) and several of its executives for \u201ccomplicity in crimes against humanity\u201d, \u201cfinancing terrorist enterprises\u201d, \u201cdeliberately endangering the lives of others\u201d and other related offenses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In June 2017, a judicial investigation was opened, leading to the indictment of several former executives of the French cement company. But it was in June 2018 that the case took on a whole new dimension, when Lafarge SA itself was indicted as a legal entity for \u201ccomplicity in crimes against humanity\u201d. \u201cThis is undoubtedly the most historic and important aspect of this entire proceeding,\u201d says Anna Kiefer, litigation and advocacy officer at Sherpa. For the first time, investigating judges ruled that \u201ccriminal responsibility for international crimes should not rest solely with individuals,\u201d but with the company itself. This is a major legal precedent, agrees Cannelle Lavite, co-director of the Business and Human Rights Department at ECCHR, as it \u201cdemonstrates above all that it is possible to criminalize a parent company\u201d for acts committed by one of its subsidiaries abroad. This contributes to \u201cdeconstructing the discourse of executives\u201d who, according to the lawyer, \u201cvery often hide behind their subsidiaries,\u201d even though \u201cthey control them through capital and hierarchical structures\u201d and despite the fact that they \u201cderive income\u201d from them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These indictments have been the subject of numerous appeals. But after several years of \u201clegal twists and turns,\u201d which we reported on in 2022 on the Justice Info<\/a>'s website, Lafarge\u2019s indictment as a legal entity was definitively confirmed by the Court of Cassation<\/a> on 16 January 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n For the civil parties, the decision of France\u2019s highest court is as much a victory as it is a huge setback. Because in the same ruling, the judges overturned the indictments for \u201cendangering the lives of others\u201d. The Court of Cassation ruled that Syrian employees of LCS could not benefit from the protections provided by French labor law. It held that the contracts were governed by Syrian law, since the main employment relationship was in Syria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But the consequences of this annulment go further for the 200 or so employees who had brought civil proceedings. \u201cEndangering the lives of others\u201d was the only other basis - along with \u201ccomplicity in crimes against humanity\u201d - that allowed workers to hope for possible compensation for the damage suffered. In fact, in another decision handed down by the Court of Cassation on 20 April 2022, the judges had ruled that their civil action on the grounds of financing terrorism was inadmissible. \u201cWhat the ruling tells us is that this offense is, by its very nature, detrimental to the public interest and cannot constitute direct and personal harm to any individual. But it does not take into account the specific nature of the plaintiffs\u2019 situation and the direct and personal harm they suffered as a result of these acts of illegal financing,\u201d explains lawyer Matthieu Bagard, alongside Le Gall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Together, they represent some 60 former employees of the Jalabiya factory. And they intend to challenge this interpretation as soon as the trial begins. The \u201clink\u201d between the danger they faced and the financing of terrorist groups is clear, according to Le Gall: \"Every day, LCS employees traveled to the Jalabiya factory, passing through checkpoints manned by armed rebel groups, but also terrorists, whom Lafarge financed to ensure traffic flow. These journeys had become a constant threat to them: they were stopped, questioned, sometimes detained or kidnapped. Their lives literally depended on the payments made by the company to these groups to keep the roads open. Without this financing system, they would have never been exposed to this danger. The offense of financing a terrorist enterprise immediately created the very conditions for the harm they suffered.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n And for LCS employees, the issue of compensation is particularly important. Because while their status as civil parties is still \u201cadmissible\u201d in the investigation for \u201ccomplicity in crimes against humanity,\u201d there is no guarantee that a second trial will take place. However, Bagard adds, \u201cwe can see that, twelve years after the events, Lafarge has recovered fairly well from its legal setbacks,\u201d but that many workers \u201cremain in extremely precarious situations\u201d and are \u201cunable to find work,\u201d whether in Syria or abroad.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For the civil parties, the main issue at stake in the hearing that opens on Tuesday in Paris is precisely this: to ensure that the employees of the Jalabiya cement plant are heard in this first trial and considered. \u201cThe debates, which the defense can sometimes make technical, must not obscure the real impacts on people who have not been properly protected,\u201d Lavite insists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Beyond the criminal responsibilities of the group and its managers, the trial could shed light on certain gray areas. In particular, the role of the French authorities in this case. In recent years, the investigation has established that some Lafarge executives passed on information to the French intelligence services. Were these services aware of the payments allegedly made by the multinational to terrorist organizations?<\/p>\n\n\n\n This sensitive issue - at a time when Western diplomacies, including the French, are reestablishing ties with a Syria now led by a former jihadist - will likely be at the heart of the defense strategy. In particular, that of Christian Herrault, the group\u2019s former deputy COO. During the proceedings, he repeatedly claimed that the French authorities, through the ministry of Foreign Affairs, had \u201cencouraged\u201d Lafarge group to pursue its activities in Syria. These statements were confirmed by Solange Doumic, his lawyer, who believes this issue \u201cis a key element of the case\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\nLafarge\u2019s \u201chistoric\u201d indictment as a legal entity<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
A victory and setbacks for the civil parties<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
On the role of the French authorities<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"Infographic:](\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syria_Lafarge-trial-infographic_@Chloe-Dubois-Justice-Info-scaled.jpg\")
![\"Illustration](\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Grands-entretien_Joanna-Kyriakakis-Mark-Drumbl_@Benoit-Peyrucq-540x360.jpg\")
<\/div><\/a>\r\n\t\t\t